Here’s a contribution from the Land of Lincoln. The car sported the red “Impeach Obama” sticker on the passenger door as well. Not everyone in this state is a liberal moron, but unfortunately we conservatives seem to be outnumbered, and most likely our ranks will become fewer as Illinois circles the drain.

Loyal LI reader Norbie

It took me a few seconds to figure out this one, which I guess makes me a ….

I snapped this in the parking lot at an event on April 16 at the Univ. of Virginia’s Miller Center for Public Affairs, featuring a discussion with Erik Prince, founder of the now-defunct Blackwater.

Check the uppermost left(!) sticker, as contrasted to the rest of the “peace” messages (including the one right below it).

But then, if this foaming-at-the-mouth leftist was honest, informed and consistent, she would be a foaming-at-the-mouth leftist hypocrite and supporter of violence against those with whom she disagrees.

Though if I had to guess, this driver will leave the bumper stickers on. Forever.

Dear Professor Jacobson,

As we were heading home from a visit to lefty family in the Berkshires this past weekend, our usual game of “spot the Subaru” was interrupted by this bold color amid the pale pastels parked on Main Street in Stockbridge.

Expecting the usual drivel, we were pleasantly surprised at the blatant attempt to foment insurrection.

Posted by neo-neocon ▪ Friday, January 23, 2015 at 7:00am1/23/2015 at 7:00am

It’s long been apparent that the West faces a special dilemma, which is expressed very well in the following passage by Roger Kimball (and “liberal” and “liberalism” in the following doesn’t just mean “liberals” as in “progressives,” but also “liberals” as in “classical liberals”):

Liberal regimes have always suffered from this paralyzing antinomy: Liberalism implies openness to other points of view, even those points of view whose success would destroy liberalism. Tolerance to those points of view is a prescription for suicide. Intolerance betrays the fundamental premise of liberalism, i.e. openness.

Of course (may I say “of course”?), there is a sense in which the antinomy is illusory, since any robust liberalism, i.e., a liberalism buttressed by a core of conservative backbone, understands that tolerance, if it is to flourish, cannot be synonymous with capitulation to ideas that would exploit tolerance only to destroy it. The “openness” that liberal society rightly cherishes is not a vacuous openness to all points of view: it is not “value neutral.” It need not, indeed it cannot, say Yes to all comers.

And yet that basic instinct for practical self-preservation, that paradoxical prohibition necessary for the general openness, is often ignored today. “Democracy is not a suicide pact”—at least, it shouldn’t be.

The origin of that last phrase lies in several statements by historic Americans, but the most specific one was by Supreme Court Justice Associate Justice Robert Jackson in 1949, in a dissent to the decision in the freedom of speech case known as Terminiello: